Tesla: Wall Street scam in plain sight

Discussion in 'Markets & Economies' started by mmm....shiney!, Feb 25, 2015.

  1. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    Isn't promoting the idea of a willing buyer and a willing seller voluntarily agreeing to exchange goods and services for money the whole foundation for most of your posts here?

    One of the parties happens to be a government acting on behalf of the people it represents and both parties have come to an agreement that provides mutual benefit. What precisely is the issue?

    The battery was sold by Tesla to the (privately owned) operator of the wind farm that tops it up, Neoen. The SA government is buying a service that provides value to it's constituents.
     
  2. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    The disconnect in the market between those that own the money and those that spend is not an issue to you? Governments and bureaucrats are notoriously poor at making financial decisions, and protected from their errors.

    If it provides value as you claim, then a free-market solution (or at least one that is not heavily subsidised by taxpayers) would make greater economic sense.
     
  3. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    Are you perhaps forgetting that this whole situation came about because the electricity privatizations have been continually botched and the market rules are rigged to benefit of the producers over the consumers?

    Having a state actor step in and bid for energy on behalf of it's constituents from a producer with disruptive technology is perhaps the best thing that could happen in a dysfunctional market.

    Personally, I don't believe it's wrong for a government to act on behalf of it's citizens to get them a more reliable service at a cheaper price. It's the whole reason for having a government in the first place.
     
  4. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    You mean the regulators failed? That’s Game, set and match I believe.

    Imposing your values on others at the same time as getting them to pay the bills for the things you like.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2017
    jerrygold likes this.
  5. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    The regulators signed off on what the private owners asked them to.

    You can see that as a failure of the regulators for caving in or you can see it as a failure of the market participants for asking in the first place that the system be rigged in their favor.

    Either way, there's a failure.

    The fact that the grid is unreliable is what causes it to be expensive: people spend extra capital building in redundancy that wouldn't be necessary if the system was more stable.

    Making an investment in stability is not the same as "paying the bills". It's the existing market players who have gone out of their way to make sure the system isn't stable to begin with because they make more profit when it's volatile.
     
  6. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,004
    Likes Received:
    1,114
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sydney
    Lets not pretend the deal was mainly between Tesla and Neoen. It was more Tesla and SA gov, then Tesla and Neoen.

    let me quote something said by Neoen.
    My main issue is that the government were deceptive how they sold it to the public. A lot of people in SA thought we are shifting to green energy and it will make bills cheaper, when this is not the case. To my understanding most of the green power will be sold to the ACT and SA will still use local gas and neighboring states gas/coal power, but have access to the battery for short buffering when needed. (please correct me if i somehow got that wrong)

    Now i think having the battery just as a buffer is a great thing, just wish the government were more straightforward to the public. But that's my wishful thinking :)
     
    mmm....shiney! likes this.
  7. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    It's not so much that the SA government is trying to deceive the public, it's that they seem to have decided to stop revealing their hand the the energy companies.

    Our energy companies (and major construction companies for that matter) are like the plumber you call over to fix a leaky tap. The suspiciously short evaluation, the furrowed brow, the sucking air through the teeth... "Pwwwh... I dunno, could easily turn into a big job..."

    You know it's just a washer that's warn out and it's not a big job at all, but your significant other or landlord insists on getting a "professional" to do it...and you get f***ked in the hip pocket as a result.

    All the old fossil fuel-heavy power companies were saying "Oh gee, we can't really do much here. Someone's come along and made a huge mess with all these wind turbines and it'll be so expensive to fix. You'll need more coal, and more gas and we're already losing money so you'll need to subsidize those assets for us."

    SA turns around and says "Wow, that much? Well, screw it, we'll just get a big battery instead. This guy is giving us a great guarantee on being able to solve the problem".

    All of a sudden the energy companies are starting to get a bit more proactive. Engie has realized it can re-open it's second gas turbine in Pelican Point after pulling Hazelwood offline. AGL has said uh, actually no thanks, to the Federal government's efforts to keep their Liddle coal station running after it's rated EOL. The SA government declined to chuck in a $25 million subsidy to keep the Port Augusta cola stations running and take on the hundreds of millions in cleanup costs even after the private owner, Alinta, was generously offering to give the stations back to the government for free. There's a 150 MW solar thermal plant being built there instead now.

    The frequent occurrence of the last or second last 5 minute block of power on the spot market costing ridiculously more money because supply mysteriously vanishes doesn't seem likely to happen much any more, now that there's a big battery that can jump in and plug gaps in the entire Eastern grid. No doubt the existing operators will be glad that this has improved grid reliability, despite the fact that the AEMO pricing rules meant they all used to benefit from those old price spikes being averaged out across a full 30 minute generating block...
     
  8. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
  9. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    In Queensland its the regulators that set the price for electricity, the regulators are a QANGO. Can’t blame the free market, at least in Qld anyway for rising electricity costs.

    Let’s face it Big A.D. you love green and hate coal.
     
  10. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    What I hate is incumbent businesses doing everything they can to keep better technology out of the market in order to maintain their profitability.

    Technology generally gets better over time. People have been researching "clean coal" for decades and there have been some good improvements, but at the same we've had solar and battery technology that's improved at a much, much faster rate.

    Sometimes you just have to look at the writing on the wall and spend some money investing in the infrastructure that will carry you through the next 25, 40, 50 years. The cozy little duopolies and oligopolies that dominate most of our industry sectors typically don't do that unless they have to, and when they do, they try to gouge us for as much as they can get away with. I'm quite happy to see there's at least one state government that's prepared to take a more proactive stance in getting better services for it's residents.

    At the end of the day, coal fired energy generation is basically just digging up old wood and setting fire to it. It's worked okay for a long time and allowed us to build a lot of cool stuff that has improved people's lives significantly but, in terms of technological advancement, we've gone about as far as we can with it.
     
  11. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Technological advancement simply for the sake of technological advancement is stupid. It has to have an immediate economic benefit or its a waste of resources that can be put to better use.

    If you’re that hung up on encumbent industries benefitting at the expense of new industries, you’ve only got your loving State to blame for that, and Musk and his cronies are quite happy to play the public funding scam to their advantage.
     
  12. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    ...and that line of thinking that ignores long-term future benefits and focuses on instant gratification is why we've now got a backlog of infrastructure that we should have built years ago because the stuff we're using now is held together with stickytape and string...like our telecommunications network...

    [​IMG]

    ...which can, like, totally, be band-aided up for only 90% of the cost of a brand new one that uses modern technology. See, we can save 10% right there! That's billions of dollars! Look how fiscally responsible we're being!

    Ah, the old libertarian go-to: if something bad happens, it's because of the government and if something good happens, it's because of the free market.
     
  13. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,004
    Likes Received:
    1,114
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sydney
    You guys both have a point. There were times when the market did better and there were times when government did better and there are times when both are shit. Free market was much better when the people that made the company worked in the company. Now CEO, board members and shareholders just want to extract as money in the shorts amount of time. This is also the same with government. The whole system is broken today.

    See Vinny has no faith in the system anymore.
    [​IMG]
     
  14. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    I said it makes no economic sense to spend money on advancing technological innovation purely for the sake of advancing technological innovation. It has to benefit those living in the present. You can't place a value on the future. You can't force the living to suffer because of an obsession with nebulous ideas around future generations that may never exit. The property rights of the living are pre-eminent over the rights of the yet-to-be living.

    And if you want to keep digging deeper and deeper yourself into your hole, keep posting about how our infrastructure has decayed whilst under the State's watch.

    Is that an old libertarian go-to? That's funny, i've never heard any libertarian saying that. I've heard libertarians say that the problem with the State spending money (unlike private businesses) is that when the money is wasted and the State goes broke, the State still exists. The actors may change but its monopoly remains. When a business goes bust on the other hand it goes. Unless of course its spending the proceeds of crime kindly provided the State.

    Musk and his crony mates are set to get $50 million of taxpayer's money over the next ten years because the SA government are Musk Fanboys and believe he will deliver value to the people of Australia. That works out that each person will contribute $2 to the Elon Musk Fanboy Cult (ignoring the fact most Australians don't contribute any tax from their earnings). My business has over 1000 likes on our facebook page, not bad for a fish and chip shop in a busted arse coastal town, so using the Elon Musk Fanboy Cult figures, I propose that the taxpayer give me $2000 per year, being $2 per person per year whose value is enhanced by the voluntary mutual trade we engage in with each other. Applying your logic, that makes perfect sense.

    I could even reach a compromise, how about the Federal government reduce the amount of $$$ they take from me without my consent by $2000 each year, that would save the taxpayer more than $2000/year as it doesn't require a filthy bureaucrat to shuffle papoers. I can spend it better than they can, I may even spend it with an eye to my future.
     
  15. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
  16. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    229
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sydney
    The direct cost of subsidy, sure.

    What about the indirect cost of, say, having the U.S. Navy constantly patrolling oil shipping routes and the Marines taking the occasional excursion to the Persian Gulf?

    Why would you need a federal rebate cheque when your whole industry is underwritten by the U.S. military?
     
  17. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Hahahaha.

    Look! A naked woman!
     
  18. leo25

    leo25 Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,004
    Likes Received:
    1,114
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sydney
    This guy did a good run down of Tesla.
     
  19. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,799
    Likes Received:
    2,115
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    Best quote out of that:

     
    bordsilver, leo25 and spannermonkey like this.
  20. Ag bullet

    Ag bullet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    876
    Likes Received:
    434
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    SE QLD
    Dogshitistan sounds charming.
     

Share This Page